This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

Here’s proof that technology really does make driving safer: Volvos equipped with the automaker’s City Safety collision avoidance system are in 27% fewer accidents than comparable vehicles. That’s a huge reduction, says the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI). City Safety is a Volvo-exclusive (at least for now in the US) laser that watches the road one car-length ahead from the vantage point of the rear view mirror. If it sees a slow or stopped car ahead, it jams on the brakes. At closing-speed differences of 9 mph or less, it avoids accidents outright; at up to 19 mph, it reduces their severity. More than 18 feet ahead, or at speeds of 20 mph and faster, City Safety doesn’t operate, nor does it stop for smaller targets (people, animals).

City Safety is standard on Volvo XC60s since 2010, on Volvo S60 sedans since 2011, and is on 2012 model S80 sedans and XC70 wagons. It kicks in so quickly that there’s no time, or need, to warn the driver in advance. The vigorous braking (50% of maximum braking force) acts as a real-time alert that pitches the driver forward, but not so violently he or she would hit the steering wheel or dash. Just in case, an indicator in the instrument panel flashes to indicate City Safety was in effect.

Volvo says City Safety is tuned so you can maneuver around parked cars without City Safety engaging and you can also override it by pressing harder on the accelerator. The only driver option is to turn it off temporarily; the next time the car starts, City Safety is back on. The scanner is an invisible infrared radar — lidar — so oncoming motorists don’t see a beam of light shooting down the highway and wonder if Martians are landing. It works day or night but its effectiveness might be hampered by really intense rain or snow (it only has to see 18 feet ahead). And it isn’t foolproof. In a demo for the media in 2010, an XC60 with a dummy (no jokes) behind the wheel slammed into the back of a truck. But that may be the exception that proves the rule of City Safety’s effectiveness.

The HLDI generated all manner of statistics to show how the first Volvo with City Safety, the XC60 crossover/SUV, stacked up against other midsize luxury SUVs and to other Volvos. Compared to other SUVs, there were 27% fewer property damage claims and 51% fewer bodily injury liability claims. Oddly, the average XC60 property claim was $270 higher than other SUVs and $646 higher than other Volvos. And that’s a good thing. Good? “Although it may seem counterintuitive,” says Matthew Moore, HLDI VP and director of the study, “higher payouts for property damage liability are a sign that City Safety works.” XC60 owners were filing fewer fender-bender claims (under $1,500), so the average cost of the claims filed by XC60 owners — $3,058 — was 10% higher than for other midsize luxury SUVs and 27% higher than for other Volvos. Overall, the pot of insurance money paid out to Volvo XC60 owners was down. HLDI compared the XC60 against other Volvos as well as competing luxury midsize SUVs because of the widespread belief that Volvo drivers for whatever reason — kids in the back, superior driving skills, afraid to drive fast, tendency to vote Democratic — might be safer even without City Safety. And that was borne out somewhat: The XC60 had 27% fewer property damage liability claims than other midsize SUVs, 19% fewer claims than other Volvos.

City Safety was designed by Germany’s Continental AG. It’s a non-exclusive license and some Fords in Europe have a version as well, according to Automotive News, but Ford hasn’t brought it to America yet.

There are also high-speed variants — loose variants — of what Volvo does with City Safety. Typically these forward collision warning systems (FCWS) are on cars with radar-based adaptive cruise control (ACC) that costs $1,000-$3,000. ACC is cruise control on steroids: You set the speed and if a car ahead slows down, you slow down, then speed up when it’s clear again. All FCWS cars warn that you’re closing too fast and might hit the moving vehicle in front. Some brake automatically. The others just scare the hell out of you when the dashboard lights up, you hear loud beeps, and you need to react. (Nuclear power plants should have such warning lights.) Nineteen automakers currently offer forward collision warning systems:

The value of City Safety goes beyond the obvious reduction in accidents. It shows automotive high tech can be good for you and your well-being. More than a few critics, including Luddites who freak at the idea of microprocessors and iPods invading the automotive realm, believe technology that assists drivers lets them less aware. Why worry about staying centered in your lane when lane departure warning will alert you and the more advanced lane keep assist nudges you back in place? HLDI and the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS) plan a report on the effectiveness for the forward collision warning systems.

So if accidents go down, Volvo XC60 owners are paying less for insurance, right? That isn’t clear. The IIHS report didn’t speculate on what would be a reasonable rate reduction. HLDI is the information-gathering arm of the IIHS, in turn funded by the nation’s auto insurers. They are tasked with tracking auto accidents with an eye toward improving safety and lowering costs or (opposing view) sucking all the fun out of driving and keeping as much money as possible in insurers’ pockets. The IIHS, for instance, never met a red light camera it didn’t like. The July 19 issue of the IIHS Status Report newsletter that covered Volvo City Safety also devoted two pages to describing cities where polls seem to show driver support for red light cameras. It’s generally agreed that red light cameras cut T-bone collisions but at the cost of more panic-brake-or-I’ll-get-ticketed rear-end collisions (the kind that City Safety might reduce). The IIHS also doesn’t mention sweetheart deals that divert more of the ticket revenue to the private camera operators than municipalities. Towns that say they adopted red light cameras for safety reasons (“it’s not about the revenue”) often kick them out for not generating enough money.

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

ExtremeTech Newsletter

Subscribe Today to get the latest ExtremeTech news delivered right to your inbox.

Email

This newsletter may contain advertising, deals, or affiliate links. Subscribing to a newsletter indicates your consent to our
Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe from the newsletter at any time.